Skip to main content

About your Search

20130215
20130215
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)
as pentagon chief will stop at nothing. they're out there beating the bushes right now for anything that will slow the process of his confirmation, anything that will give them more time to find something they can build enough on to bring the man down. question. who are they trying to bring down? is it president obama's pick for secretary of defense? or is it the man the american people have chosen? is it about a confirmation or a desperate push to undermine the president's second term? listen to those attacking senator hagel, and you hear the yelps of pain this motley crew of neocons and right-wingers from the sun belt feel even though from the american people's choice of last november. what they hate, despise really, is the fact now in the history books that the american people in great numbers reject their war-like jingoistic notions of what america stands for. their problem is not with obama's choice for a cabinet appointment. their problem is with america's choice of who it wants to be president, who it wants deciding what we should be doing in this world. obama works for peace
as pentagon chief will stop at nothing. they're trying to slow the process of his confirmation, anything to give them time to find something to bring the man down. question, who are they try king to bring down? is it president obama's pick for secretary of defense? or is it the man the american people have chosen? is it about a confirmation or a desperate push to undermine the president's second term. listen to those attacking senator hagel and you'll hear the yelps of pain, this motley crew of neocons and the sun belt feel. what they hate, despise, really, is the fact that now in the history books, the american people voting in great numbers reject their war-reich jinglistic notions of what america stands for. their problem is with america's choice of who it wants to be president. who it wants to sign. and what we should be doing in this world. obama works for peace. he works hard for it. this crowd has other ideas. and that's "hardball" for now. happy valentine's, everybody. what a day. and thanks for being with us tonight. "the ed show" with ed schultz starts right now. >>> good eveni
an opportunity to cut the pentagon like this. we've had fat in the pentagon for 30 years. nobody's done a damn thing about it. if there's a compromise on sequester, some good things will happen because there are some people that are going to get hurt if we go over the cliff, but we have an opportunity here to cut the most bloated agency in all of government and serious cutting, and i think we ought to take it. >> we could take $45 billion this year out of the military budget. you're okay with that? >> yes, i am. and i think we can do that and we can make it work. you know there, have been tons of programs in the pentagon that the pentagon never wanted. that congresspeople have put in there. >> sure. howard dean, great to have you with us. always. >> thanks. >> appreciate it. wayne lapierre might be one of the greatest hucksters of all time. i'll show you what's behind his paranoia campaign next. tea party backers show a perverse sense of humor by creating a hillary clinton sex tape. david corn broke the story. he joins us on the panel tonight. stay with us. ♪ you know my heart burns for you.
? >> at the pentagon. >> this is the first time hearing of this. when did this happen? did they make this decision on the cruise ship? >> no. no, they didn't. it actually happened in washington. >> really? that's fascinating. >> which is its own permanent port-a-potty. >> okay. mika, for those of us that were just sitting there looking at a cruise ship for 24 hours instead of following the real news, why don't you catch us up with what actually happened yesterday in the news. >> republicans blocked a vote yesterday that would have ended the debate and allowed for a final decision one way or another. democrats fell just shy of the votes needed to advance the process. something president obama chalked up to partisan politics. >> there's nothing in the constitution that says that somebody should get 60 votes. there are only a handful of instances in which there's been any kind of filibuster of anybody for a cabinet position in our history. and what seems to be happening -- and this has been growing over time -- is the republican minority in the senate seem to think that the rule now is that you have
that came out recently. it did suggest the pentagon is pushing the pentagon that would only keep 8000 troops in afghanistan. i know that general austin, you weren't a part of the process so far, but can you support a plan that was scheduled withdraws troops in advance? you know, we're looking at withdraws troops in afghanistan and according to this article from a passing down to 1000 within a short period of time, i have questions if we can even maintain our mission, let alone complete the mission. how can you make decisions on troop withdraw when sec previously, so much depends on the ground, what the government is doing, what variability eyes up to that point. how would you approach a proposal like that? >> i certainly would first really work hard to make sure i fully understood with the leadership wanted to get done moving into the future. certainly my advice is the commander on the ground or commander central command would provide my advice based upon breaking the security forces are and the conditions in theater and what i think we need to do to move forward to make sure we maintain the
cain and people who don't want -- it sounds like rhetoric, literally don't want the post filled at the pentagon because of their grudges. >> julian, the senate will take up mr. hagel's nomination when it reconvenes in ten days atime but i want to bring in something from richard hass. here he is with our own joe scarborough. >> we're hearing in the end most likely he's going to pass and be secretary of defense, so why hold him up over a recess when the pentagon desperately needs somebody at the helm? >> because in a funny sort of way, joe, it's exactly what mccain said. it's a way of getting their pound of flesh. >> julian, pound of flesh. is that really what this is all about? given that our troops deserve a leader because they serve with every ounce of their bodies, they give their bodies. >> well, i don't know that they will get a pound of flesh and it is a rizable reason. politics is about picking good fights. this is a fight the republicans will lose and it's a bad fight and you wonder why after what's happened to the republican party they continue to pick bad fights they're going to lose.
and if and i think it's a when, he does eventually take up that office in the pentagon. it's definitely poisoning the well in some regard, given i think the president had hoped to make a fresh start and seek accommodation in the beginning of his second term. this is not going to make anything easier on the other negotiations that are coming. >> molly, thank you very much. greatly appreciate you joining us for the postscript. we'll see you soon. >> thank you. >> president obama just arrived in his hometown of chicago. in just about an hour, the president is expected to talk about gun control at a high school there not far from his home. up next, i'll talk to a woman whose pregnant sister and her brother-in-law were gunned down by a 16-year-old in chicago. what is she hoping to hear from this president today? lobsterfest is the king of all promotions. there's nothing like our grilled lobster and lobster tacos. the bar harbor bake is really worth trying. [ male announcer ] get more during red lobster's lobsterfest. with the year's largest selection of mouth-watering lobster entrees. like o
the pentagon and military posts have strong seasoned leadership teams. regardless of having the secretary or not having one is a portent concern. -- a point of concern. you have a good strong team that will be able to manage through this process. they have seen this coming. as you would expect the military to do, they are prepared. host: new hampshire, and the pennant caller -- caller: morning and thank you. i am so tired of the irresponsibility of the republicans. the chuck hagel thing is preposterous. how does it serve the nation to delay the president's choice? it is the first time in history that a filibuster has been used against a cabinet the sequester is the height of irresponsibility. why risk a potential double dip recession just so you can score political points? finally, you criticized the president for being out of washington and yet, -- that was and finally -- hear you are supporting a filibuster and finally, though you partly answer the question or just now, what your district and tails are large installations, i assume, other than fort campbell in your district. my brother
in the action, so to speak. but the pentagon has to deal with congress, with republican lawmakers and won't this affect their relationship? >> of course not. this is always transaction. as it happens for the last 70 or 100 years. whatever of the things, hagel was a senator, he understands how the place works how he's got three people that can help him because the president doesn't like dealing with the senate very much. who can blame him now he's got joe biden, john kerry and chuck hagel all skilled with dealing with the senate and that will be helpful for him moving through. >> you know, carol, this is one of the reasons why it's so problematic for republicans. and rich is right that there have been some holds and some there be something like this in the past. but we're in a very different place right now. and the reasons that they are stating as to why they are against chuck hagel do not pass muster. >> right. >> the american people are sick of petty politics in washington. this is a president, he has said he's willing to meet the republicans halfway. we have yet to see the halfway that
on that "washington post" article that came out recently. it did suggest that the pentagon is pushing a plan that we keep on about 8000 troops in afghanistan. i know that general austin, you weren't a part of the planning process thus far, but can you supported plan that would scheduled withdrawal of troops in advance? you know, we are looking at withdrawal of troops in afghanistan, and according to this article from about 8000 down to 1000 within a very short period of time. i have questions if we can even maintain our mission, let alone complete the mission. how can you make decisions on troop withdrawal when, as you stated previously, so much depends upon conditions on the ground, what the government is doing, what their abilities are up to that point. how would you approach a proposal like that? >> i certainly would first really work hard to make sure i fully understood what the leadership wanted to get done moving into the future. and i certainly, my advice as a commander on the ground or commander of central command, i would provide my advice based upon where i think the security forces are, a
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)